If you are new to the forums, you must register a free account before you can post. The forums have a separate registration from the rest of www.chronofhorse.com, so your log in information for one will not automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

I can only imagine the horror on the face of any man who had to bear witness to me trying that pose in his presence. :-)

As others have said, I don't find her actual outfit inappropriate, but it's the overall message that I receive from the ad that bothers me (to me it seems like an air-head "come hither and canoe me from behind while I giggle and flip my hair a lot" kind of thing), but maybe I am confusing the model with my mare, who is in season.

But, for those who are bothered with the ad, you might consider going to the Dover website and letting Dover know your thoughts. I did, just because to me the model looks like she's trying to be cute and sexy (and an airhead) and I do not want my adolescent daughter confusing horse time with being cute and sexy (and an airhead). I want her riding to be a respite from all that stuff, where it's just about her and the pony. I think the Dover representative whom I "chatted with" probably thinks I am crazy, but, no. I am just getting old and cantankerous, which is lots of fun. :-)

Hahaha! I'd like to think they are getting a lot of those calls, just like I heard it drove a lot of women bonkers when Always put on their adhesive strip covers the slogan "Have A Happy Period". I know it made me say "WHAT?! "HAPPY"?! WHO SAID THAT?!"

You've motivated me now...I might make a call or drop an email myself...I know a lot of mothers who want their daughters to be into horses as a way of keeping them from "getting into trouble" and don't want them using the barn as a "come-hither" kind of place, for certain.

I found the ad odd in the way that I find 'horse' related ads odd when the model has beautiful nails, or no muscling whatsoever... However, I know that models are models and usually not real horseback riders. She's looking a little coy, sure. She's standing in maybe a not "traditional" way, but heck, I do the same. And you bet I wear shorts and tanks when it's hot and the farrier is coming, maybe I'll get a better deal! (mostly kidding ) Should girls be sex objects? God no. But if you have a great smile, aren't you going to smile a lot? If you have a great butt, heck, wear those pants!

I had a conversation with my mother the other day along these lines. She was upset about the ceo of Abercrombie saying something about not wanting to make clothes for heavier people. I get it, that's not fair. But if you're so heavy that you actually can't find a size in many stores, that's a health issue. And America has a weight problem. That's not really okay. I don't believe stores should discriminate, but then again doesn't "fuller fillies" discriminate against skinny females?

And going on a side-rant (hopefully people don't attack too much), we should all aim to be healthy and in shape. Period. I get really sick of people talking about "normal" if they are in fact obese. Having extra cushion is great, I'm all for it. Bring on the curves. But, there is a limit to that. I don't like being discriminated against because I work out a lot and try to skip the late night meal. When I feel in shape and healthy, I feel happier. If I can pull off the look in that ad, I'm going to dang well try!!

It's a great marketing ad. The woman looks great, the pants look pretty cool, I actually really love the shirt. It's not very horse-y, no. That is the odd part. But it got us talking! You know the brand now if you didn't before.

I found the ad odd in the way that I find 'horse' related ads odd when the model has beautiful nails, or no muscling whatsoever... However, I know that models are models and usually not real horseback riders. She's looking a little coy, sure. She's standing in maybe a not "traditional" way, but heck, I do the same. And you bet I wear shorts and tanks when it's hot and the farrier is coming, maybe I'll get a better deal! (mostly kidding ) Should girls be sex objects? God no. But if you have a great smile, aren't you going to smile a lot? If you have a great butt, heck, wear those pants!

I had a conversation with my mother the other day along these lines. She was upset about the ceo of Abercrombie saying something about not wanting to make clothes for heavier people. I get it, that's not fair. But if you're so heavy that you actually can't find a size in many stores, that's a health issue. And America has a weight problem. That's not really okay. I don't believe stores should discriminate, but then again doesn't "fuller fillies" discriminate against skinny females?

And going on a side-rant (hopefully people don't attack too much), we should all aim to be healthy and in shape. Period. I get really sick of people talking about "normal" if they are in fact obese. Having extra cushion is great, I'm all for it. Bring on the curves. But, there is a limit to that. I don't like being discriminated against because I work out a lot and try to skip the late night meal. When I feel in shape and healthy, I feel happier. If I can pull off the look in that ad, I'm going to dang well try!!

It's a great marketing ad. The woman looks great, the pants look pretty cool, I actually really love the shirt. It's not very horse-y, no. That is the odd part. But it got us talking! You know the brand now if you didn't before.

Yes, America has a weight problem. But there are way too many places that it is difficult to buy nice clothing that fits if you are female and NOT skinny and/or are over a certain height, or are male and are under a certain height or weight. I am speaking as a person who is not obese but still has to physically try on clothes and not order them from a catalog to be sure they fit, in part because we have these stupid women's sizes which vary so widely and hardly ever get actual measurements, but also because some stores cater to only certain sized people. I know I am not alone in that and that other non-obese people have the same problem.

Let Abercrombie not make the clothes. I am sure another retailer will be glad to pick up that money for them, the customers will find that company eventually. I personally never saw them make anything you couldn't get somewhere else anyway.

Yes, America has a weight problem. But there are way too many places that it is difficult to buy nice clothing that fits if you are female and NOT skinny and/or are over a certain height, or are male and are under a certain height or weight. I am speaking as a person who is not obese but still has to physically try on clothes and not order them from a catalog to be sure they fit, in part because we have these stupid women's sizes which vary so widely and hardly ever get actual measurements, but also because some stores cater to only certain sized people. I know I am not alone in that and that other non-obese people have the same problem.

Let Abercrombie not make the clothes. I am sure another retailer will be glad to pick up that money for them, the customers will find that company eventually. I personally never saw them make anything you couldn't get somewhere else anyway.

I do agree with this. I hope my first post didn't sound arrogant, I just wanted to point out those sides. I am certainly not a size 0 and will never be, but I want to eliminate both extremeists views if that makes sense

Oy, the Ambercrombie CEO calling people fat and ugly, meanwhile he looks like a half melted mannaquin.

I like seeing real people in ads, especially in equestrian ads. For whatever reason, it has the opposite affect on me than what marketers would think - I want to buy something that isn't on a size 4, 16 year old model. I'm always skeptical of what it will look like on me when all I see is a model, since I am "plus size" at 5'7" and a size 10, at least by the fashion industry standards.

Better yet, cut out the model all together and just show an image of the article of clothing.

I'm a mother of three girls, ages 23, 18 & 17. I've always been concerned about the culture of sexuality that they're exposed to every day. It takes vigilance to raise children (especially girls) in this world . I'm much more worried about the clothing that's marketed to pre-teens & teens, what's on tv and the internet, don't even get me started on music lyrics. THIS ad is NOT what I worry about. I'm really surprised that some people find it offensive. I simply don't get it.

A number of you have said it very well: it's the culture of sexualizing women and girls in EVERY aspect of their life, up to and including going to the barn, that is now so normal people don't even get it.

Yeah, try the pose in your normal every day interactions. Teach your little girls this is what they're supposed to do.

For all of us saying "they don't know their market! Who are they marketing to??" --umm, yes they do, in somewhat alarming detail (thanks to Facebook, Google, and every other internet sites that track our every click and eyeball movement, and sell that data). That the ad turns you off, chances are you are simply not the market they're going for. Young, affluent women are marketing gold-- no mortgages or kids to make them think twice about splurging on breeches that will make them look good, or because last year's breeches look a little passe because of the pocket embroidery.
I'm of course exaggerating their foolishness, but surely you can agree that impulsive buyers who value looking cute are a more lucrative demographic than mature, sensible, more conservative women who value practicality, durability, fit.

BUT, in glancing at the online catalog to see the picture, I did come across this one that looks eggregiously photoshopped to make her waist impossibly skinny. Or else she has a serious problem with spinal curvature.
Now THAT does tick me off, and I think that stuff does negatively affect young women's self-image.

ETA: OK, just to make sure I'm not being a pearl-clutching old biddy, I just went and tried that photoshopped pose. Minus the beautiful long hair, and 18-yr-old body, I did manage to achieve a similar bend in my waist. So, despite being slightly painful, it is physically possible. I hereby retract my accusation of photoshopping. So glad no one was home to see me doing that. HA!

I agree that it is physically possible.
I have wider hips on a thin frame with a very small waist, so if I make one hip even with my rib cage such that there is a straight line, there is a similar curve on the other side.

All I can say is, for those of you who think the pose is benign, put yourself in that exact same pose, looking over your shoulder with your hair down, same down-tilt of the head and same smile, and perform that pose aimed at your vet. Or your farrier. Or the clerk at the feed store. Or any adult who is not your SO. Because it is just the cute, normal way you always interact with people, right?

As for those who say it is not that bad, I agree, in the sense that it is in line with what you would see in a Target ad. But it is also a statement of the way we are inundated with women posed as sex objects to the point where it is normal and unremarkable. Maybe that is what the OP was getting at; that and the idea that a horse tack catalog would seem to be a bastion against the unrelenting deluge of that kind of marketing.

Well if I looked like the gal in the catalog, I might try it, except for the feed store clerk who's a woman. But if my 60 year old short fat self tried it, they'd think I had lost my mind. Now I have noticed if I take my cute, shapely 16 yo daughter to the feed store, the young men who work there fall all over themselves trying to help me. Same thing at restaurants with young male waitstaff, if DD is with me, my drink glass and bread bowl are constantly being refilled.

I don't know that all of your logic is sound here...there are several clothing catalogs, at least one horse-related that I know of and probably more, that have built their business on selling to clients who are NOT young/sexy/skinny...who use models that are "just like them" but also have the clothing line geared toward those people. If a person does not fit the clothes like the model, they will not be able to buy and wear the clothing being modeled no matter how much they might want to...they're going to have to buy something that FITS. The average mature woman will usually not be able to buy something geared toward a skinny teeny-bopper and have it fit.

Several major retailers have made a hell of a lot of money by realizing this.

Yes, there are “niche” markets for plus sized, mature, teens etc. Dover is a big player in the horse retail world, a Macy’s of equestrians you could say. Just like Macy’s, while they may have some models in various sizes etc (Dover has kids, males, a few mature women on their pages), the majority of their marketing follows the traditional format, of attracting the largest market with what is most universally appealing, a young, attractive female.

My mother recently bought a Martha Stewart magazine subscription for me (gee thanks mom) – and as soon as my address was entered into that circulation – the catalogs started. One features “dresses” (the non PC term would be moo moos), and terrible house clothes. I imagine the target market is women with plenty of idle time to spend in oversized sun dresses. They have not sexed up the models – the target audience is fairly small for this specialty retailer, and they are marketing accordingly.

If the appeal of the model, played no role in sales, why wouldn’t all of the catalogs just show us a picture, waist down, front and back, of breeches all on the same mannequin? They stage these photos as they do, because the photo, the model, the imagine that they are portraying affects our buying decisions.

But, but, that's what I don't really get. Even though I don't see anything wrong with that particular picture except for the fact that it does not especially makes me want to browse the catalogue, Dover's target market is not MEN! I would think the vast majority of their products are sold to women! And that most of these women would rather have a sexy TB or a hunky WB or a cute pony on the cover!

Women are actually the target of photos using especially emaciated models as they (shown by studies) don't like to buy clothes from photos using average-size women (let alone plus-size models with plus-size clothes.) Men tend to prefer (again tested in studies) women a bit more amply endowed up top and below ('hourglass', see why VS uses larger-chested or enhanced models to make men look.)

My objection to the photo is she's crushing her chin against her shoulder and looks like she has no neck. Also, the shirt looks wrinkly.

For all of us saying "they don't know their market! Who are they marketing to??" --umm, yes they do, in somewhat alarming detail (thanks to Facebook, Google, and every other internet sites that track our every click and eyeball movement, and sell that data). That the ad turns you off, chances are you are simply not the market they're going for. Young, affluent women are marketing gold-- no mortgages or kids to make them think twice about splurging on breeches that will make them look good, or because last year's breeches look a little passe because of the pocket embroidery.
I'm of course exaggerating their foolishness, but surely you can agree that impulsive buyers who value looking cute are a more lucrative demographic than mature, sensible, more conservative women who value practicality, durability, fit.

BUT, in glancing at the online catalog to see the picture, I did come across this one that looks eggregiously photoshopped to make her waist impossibly skinny. Or else she has a serious problem with spinal curvature.
Now THAT does tick me off, and I think that stuff does negatively affect young women's self-image.

ETA: OK, just to make sure I'm not being a pearl-clutching old biddy, I just went and tried that photoshopped pose. Minus the beautiful long hair, and 18-yr-old body, I did manage to achieve a similar bend in my waist. So, despite being slightly painful, it is physically possible. I hereby retract my accusation of photoshopping. So glad no one was home to see me doing that. HA!

Actually looking at the shadow and the edge of the shirt, you were right the first time. She's 'shopped there, probably to make it skinnier and to fix bunching/wrinkling that pose would actually cause.

It just looks a bit silly to me, especially for the cover of a tack store. I tossed it right in the recycling bin. At least the ones with horses on the cover I tend to glance at. Now if they put Nacho Figueras (SP.?) shirtless on the cover with the same pose I would probably put it on the fridge!

Well I was certainly disappointed after eagerly rushing to my mailbox to get the racy Dover catalogue with much talked about new centerfold section. Instead I got a regular Dover catalogue with perfectly respectable cover. I think some people in this thread should get off that mailing list and sign up for these folk's catalogue. http://gothicgarments.com/menu3/index.html It might be more your speed.

Oh, the outrage! How DARE she look over shoulder and grin whilst being attractive and fully clothed! Be sure to write to your representatives in Congress! And the pope! And all of the media! Maybe we can stage a mass burning of all the offensive catalog covers. For the children!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oy, the Ambercrombie CEO calling people fat and ugly, meanwhile he looks like a half melted mannaquin.

I like seeing real people in ads, especially in equestrian ads. For whatever reason, it has the opposite affect on me than what marketers would think - I want to buy something that isn't on a size 4, 16 year old model. I'm always skeptical of what it will look like on me when all I see is a model, since I am "plus size" at 5'7" and a size 10, at least by the fashion industry standards.

Better yet, cut out the model all together and just show an image of the article of clothing.

I love it when they show the employees and their horses! Let the employees "model" and save a few bucks.

I totally get the idea that some people would much rather see a horse or a horse & rider on the cover of a tack catalog; that it used to be the one place where attractive women were depicted as simply women, without always being portrayed as flirty.

PeteyPie said it so well: "But it is also a statement of the way we are inundated with women posed as sex objects to the point where it is normal and unremarkable. Maybe that is what the OP was getting at; that and the idea that a horse tack catalog would seem to be a bastion against the unrelenting deluge of that kind of marketing."

And Gestalt: "Once again my point is lost. I'm not jealous of the model, I'm not clutching my pearls...."

And SharonA: "I did, just because to me the model looks like she's trying to be cute and sexy (and an airhead) and I do not want my adolescent daughter confusing horse time with being cute and sexy (and an airhead). I want her riding to be a respite from all that stuff, where it's just about her and the pony."